Talk:High Valyrian Vocabulary

From Dothraki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(How to treat unconfirmed nominatives?)
(==)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
======================================================================================================
 
======================================================================================================
 
I was thinking about ''lōtinti''... Can it be the accusative singular of a substantivized form of something like ''lōtinta'', from a verb like ''lōtinagon'' "to bake"? Has DJP said something about it?  
 
I was thinking about ''lōtinti''... Can it be the accusative singular of a substantivized form of something like ''lōtinta'', from a verb like ''lōtinagon'' "to bake"? Has DJP said something about it?  
''lōtinagon > lōtinta > lōtinty > lōtinti''? Since we're basically saying "(I want/I'll have/etc.) pigeon cake again, please."
+
''lōtinagon > lōtinta > lōtinty > lōtinti''? Since we're basically saying "(I want/I'll have/etc.) pigeon pie again, please."
  
 
And why did you list ''nopāzma'' as aquatic? Did DJP say something about it?
 
And why did you list ''nopāzma'' as aquatic? Did DJP say something about it?
 
-[[User:Papaya|Papaya]]
 
-[[User:Papaya|Papaya]]

Revision as of 15:14, 10 May 2014

How to treat unconfirmed nominatives?

My question comes because a few sentences from High Valyrian 101 at the Making Game of Thrones Blog. Right now I am putting an asterisk before them, for example I listed *rhūqes "pigeon" (-es being common for animals) which is the genitive rhūqo in the sentence. Is this appropriate? Otherwise, feel free to comment out these entries until we receive confirmation from DJP. --Juelos 10:03, 9 May 2014 (CDT)

I generally do comment out such swords until I get confirmation. I wasn't planning to add those entries until I blogged about hem on my journal, and I'll probably hold off on editing your contributions until then too. But you did a good job overall, and it's about time that someone broke my monopoly here anyway. --Iustinus 11:38, 9 May 2014 (CDT)
==========================================================================================

I was thinking about lōtinti... Can it be the accusative singular of a substantivized form of something like lōtinta, from a verb like lōtinagon "to bake"? Has DJP said something about it? lōtinagon > lōtinta > lōtinty > lōtinti? Since we're basically saying "(I want/I'll have/etc.) pigeon pie again, please."

And why did you list nopāzma as aquatic? Did DJP say something about it? -Papaya

Personal tools